Cargando…

Impact of Sugammadex Versus Neostigmine/Glycopyrrolate on Perioperative Efficiency

PURPOSE: Neuromuscular blockade in the operating room necessitates the utilization of reversal agents to accelerate postoperative recovery and sustain operating room patient throughput. Cholinesterase inhibitors represent the historical standard of care for neuromuscular blockade reversal within ane...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Deyhim, Niaz, Beck, Amanda, Balk, Jonathan, Liebl, Michael G
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Dove 2020
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6999542/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32099426
http://dx.doi.org/10.2147/CEOR.S221308
_version_ 1783493943531405312
author Deyhim, Niaz
Beck, Amanda
Balk, Jonathan
Liebl, Michael G
author_facet Deyhim, Niaz
Beck, Amanda
Balk, Jonathan
Liebl, Michael G
author_sort Deyhim, Niaz
collection PubMed
description PURPOSE: Neuromuscular blockade in the operating room necessitates the utilization of reversal agents to accelerate postoperative recovery and sustain operating room patient throughput. Cholinesterase inhibitors represent the historical standard of care for neuromuscular blockade reversal within anesthesia practice. Sugammadex, a synthetic gamma-cyclodextrin, was introduced to the market with evidence of more rapid and predictable reversal of neuromuscular blockade compared to alternative agents. Higher medication acquisition costs have limited more extensive use of sugammadex compared to that of neostigmine/glycopyrrolate. The purpose of this study was to examine the impact of sugammadex versus neostigmine/glycopyrrolate on perioperative efficiency to validate medication acquisition cost value. METHODS: A retrospective investigation was performed of patients with a surgical procedure at Houston Methodist Hospital from July 31, 2017 through August 1, 2018. The primary endpoint was time from reversal medication administration to operating room exit. Patient-specific doses were assessed to calculate average medication acquisition costs. The economic benefits of sugammadex were measured through review of average operating room and postanesthesia care unit costs per minute. RESULTS: There were a total of 640 surgical cases at Houston Methodist Hospital eligible for inclusion into the research study. The time from medication administration to operating room exit was significantly faster for sugammadex compared to neostigmine/glycopyrrolate (P<0.001) upon univariate analysis. However, when measured with linear regression, the difference in operating room exit time between sugammadex and neostigmine/glycopyrrolate was no longer statistically significant (P=0.122). Medication acquisition cost review highlighted a difference of $178.20, favoring use of neostigmine/glycopyrrolate. CONCLUSION: The utilization of sugammadex does not correlate to consequential time saved in the operating room or extrapolation to workflow capacity for increased surgical case volume. Consideration of the medication acquisition cost promotes more restrictive use of sugammadex to indications with clinical relevance.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6999542
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2020
publisher Dove
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-69995422020-02-25 Impact of Sugammadex Versus Neostigmine/Glycopyrrolate on Perioperative Efficiency Deyhim, Niaz Beck, Amanda Balk, Jonathan Liebl, Michael G Clinicoecon Outcomes Res Original Research PURPOSE: Neuromuscular blockade in the operating room necessitates the utilization of reversal agents to accelerate postoperative recovery and sustain operating room patient throughput. Cholinesterase inhibitors represent the historical standard of care for neuromuscular blockade reversal within anesthesia practice. Sugammadex, a synthetic gamma-cyclodextrin, was introduced to the market with evidence of more rapid and predictable reversal of neuromuscular blockade compared to alternative agents. Higher medication acquisition costs have limited more extensive use of sugammadex compared to that of neostigmine/glycopyrrolate. The purpose of this study was to examine the impact of sugammadex versus neostigmine/glycopyrrolate on perioperative efficiency to validate medication acquisition cost value. METHODS: A retrospective investigation was performed of patients with a surgical procedure at Houston Methodist Hospital from July 31, 2017 through August 1, 2018. The primary endpoint was time from reversal medication administration to operating room exit. Patient-specific doses were assessed to calculate average medication acquisition costs. The economic benefits of sugammadex were measured through review of average operating room and postanesthesia care unit costs per minute. RESULTS: There were a total of 640 surgical cases at Houston Methodist Hospital eligible for inclusion into the research study. The time from medication administration to operating room exit was significantly faster for sugammadex compared to neostigmine/glycopyrrolate (P<0.001) upon univariate analysis. However, when measured with linear regression, the difference in operating room exit time between sugammadex and neostigmine/glycopyrrolate was no longer statistically significant (P=0.122). Medication acquisition cost review highlighted a difference of $178.20, favoring use of neostigmine/glycopyrrolate. CONCLUSION: The utilization of sugammadex does not correlate to consequential time saved in the operating room or extrapolation to workflow capacity for increased surgical case volume. Consideration of the medication acquisition cost promotes more restrictive use of sugammadex to indications with clinical relevance. Dove 2020-01-31 /pmc/articles/PMC6999542/ /pubmed/32099426 http://dx.doi.org/10.2147/CEOR.S221308 Text en © 2020 Deyhim et al. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/ This work is published and licensed by Dove Medical Press Limited. The full terms of this license are available at https://www.dovepress.com/terms.php and incorporate the Creative Commons Attribution – Non Commercial (unported, v3.0) License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/). By accessing the work you hereby accept the Terms. Non-commercial uses of the work are permitted without any further permission from Dove Medical Press Limited, provided the work is properly attributed. For permission for commercial use of this work, please see paragraphs 4.2 and 5 of our Terms (https://www.dovepress.com/terms.php).
spellingShingle Original Research
Deyhim, Niaz
Beck, Amanda
Balk, Jonathan
Liebl, Michael G
Impact of Sugammadex Versus Neostigmine/Glycopyrrolate on Perioperative Efficiency
title Impact of Sugammadex Versus Neostigmine/Glycopyrrolate on Perioperative Efficiency
title_full Impact of Sugammadex Versus Neostigmine/Glycopyrrolate on Perioperative Efficiency
title_fullStr Impact of Sugammadex Versus Neostigmine/Glycopyrrolate on Perioperative Efficiency
title_full_unstemmed Impact of Sugammadex Versus Neostigmine/Glycopyrrolate on Perioperative Efficiency
title_short Impact of Sugammadex Versus Neostigmine/Glycopyrrolate on Perioperative Efficiency
title_sort impact of sugammadex versus neostigmine/glycopyrrolate on perioperative efficiency
topic Original Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6999542/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32099426
http://dx.doi.org/10.2147/CEOR.S221308
work_keys_str_mv AT deyhimniaz impactofsugammadexversusneostigmineglycopyrrolateonperioperativeefficiency
AT beckamanda impactofsugammadexversusneostigmineglycopyrrolateonperioperativeefficiency
AT balkjonathan impactofsugammadexversusneostigmineglycopyrrolateonperioperativeefficiency
AT lieblmichaelg impactofsugammadexversusneostigmineglycopyrrolateonperioperativeefficiency